Reposted from David Suzuki Foundation.

---

 

Too Many Problems

David Suzuki

News that global warming could push one quarter of the world’s plants and animals to the edge of extinction by 2050 recently made headlines around the world. But did the stories do more harm than good?

The forecast is truly grim. A major international research paper published in the journal Nature reports that about one million species could be doomed to extinction. The culprit? Heat-trapping gases we are pumping into the atmosphere through vehicle exhaust, power plant and factory smokestacks and home chimneys.

So, faced with such alarming news, what did people do? Did millions say “That’s it, no more SUV for me!” and commit to public transit? Did thousands call, write or email their elected leaders and demand action on global warming? Did corporate executives commit to making their industries cleaner?

No. Instead, this terrible news was largely met with a collective shrug. To be fair, it was more of a collective “Isn’t that horrible!” or “How awful!” rather than a shrug, but the effect is the same. For the average person, nothing will change.

 

Why? Well, most people are simply overwhelmed by such news because the whole thing seems beyond their control. When that happens, people tune out. They have too many other things to deal with in their lives to figure out one more problem in the world – especially something as incomprehensibly big as climate change. Rather than being spurred to action, such news without context can drive many people to a defensive position.

Just as consistent news reports focusing on street crime creates fear and drives people off the streets (thereby actually making the streets more dangerous) overwhelming environmental news also causes people to retreat into themselves and inadvertently make things worse. For example, rather than taking action to reduce global warming, some people may purchase a bigger, heavier vehicle “to keep the family safe.”

Believe it or not, this actually creates a market for more environmentally unfriendly products. I can see automotive executives sitting in a boardroom discussing how to capitalize on concerns about global warming. “People are worried about what global warming. What can we do about that?” asks an executive. “Bigger air conditioners to beat the heat!” says one. “Bigger everything to make people feel more secure,” says another. This is what’s called “meeting market demand.”

Climate studies are vital to our understanding of the atmosphere and how we are changing it. But as studies pile up, we have to look beyond the impacts of what will happen if we don’t change to how to make the changes necessary to prevent the worst-case scenarios from coming to pass. Right now, we are stuck in the mud and spinning our wheels.

All citizens can help by reducing the amount of energy we use. But to really slow global warming, Canadians need the kind of leadership and strategies that can only occur at the highest levels. Our government has adopted the Kyoto Protocol, the first small, but important, step to address climate change. Unfortunately, little has been done to get started on this essential task. Comments made by our new Minister of Natural Resources, John Efford, about expanding oil and gas production in Canada are not very encouraging. The minister appears unaware of any connection between energy use and global warming.

In his upcoming Throne speech, Prime Minister Martin would do well to give Canadians a sense about how he plans on dealing with issues like air pollution and climate change. This will require a new focus, from fossil fuels and nuclear subsidies, to clean, renewable energy and better efficiency. We can meet the challenge of climate change and doing so will make Canada a stronger, more competitive country.

So to our new prime minister and his cabinet, please don’t accept the status quo. It’s time for a new vision and a new future. You are our leaders – so lead. One million species and the next generation of Canadians will thank you.

 

 

---

 

Read Ross Gelbspan’s HISTORY AT RISK: THE CRISIS OF THE GLOBAL CLIMATE

GoogleGlobal Warming

Visit the David Suzuki Foundation

Reposted from  ENN.

---

Nothing Simple about Nature

David Suzuki

People generally like simple answers. This happened, so this happened.

Cause and effect. Simple.

But nature doesn’t work that way.  Just when we think we’ve got something figured out, another idea comes along that turns our preconceived notions upside down. In spite of all our scientific advances, we are only just beginning to understand how ecosystems work.

Consider invasive species. Plants and animals evolve to fill particular roles within a given ecosystem. The population of each of these species is usually held in check by other forces, such as climate, predators or food availability. When we take a species out of its native home and transport it elsewhere, it may face new challenges and die off, or it may find itself virtually unencumbered by constraining forces.

When the latter happens, the species can become “invasive.” That is, it can flourish, become a pest to human beings and overwhelm native species. In fact, invasive species are believed to be a major cause of the loss of biodiversity worldwide. Biologists have long known that the lack of insect enemies is a key factor in determining if a plant species becomes invasive, but we are finding out that the situation is decidedly more complex. We now know that another, surprising agent may also be involved in the success of an invasive plant – soil organisms.

Most of us tend to think of soil as inert matter, but it is very much alive, replete with microscopic organisms that can either enhance a plant’s capacity to grow and flourish, or hinder it. A recent study published in the journal Nature has found that spotted knapweed, which was introduced to North America through imported alfalfa seeds more than a century ago, has likely been able to spread so profusely, not because it lacked insect enemies, but because it lacked microscopic soil enemies. In Europe and Asia, specific soil organisms help keep the plant from becoming an invasive weed, but these microbes aren’t found in North American soil.

Just as few people would have thought that soil microbes could have such a profound effect on the success of a plant species, few would likely think that reducing fishing to protect fish stocks would actually harm seabird populations. Yet that is exactly what has happened in Europe’s North Sea.

One of the North Sea’s top predators, the great skua, has greatly benefited from the leftovers of commercial fishing. Over the years, these birds have learned to scavenge fish guts and undersized fish tossed back by fishing boats. They’ve eaten well. As a result, the great skua population is now 200 times larger than it was a century ago.

However, fish stocks in the North Sea are in trouble from years of overfishing. New European Union policies have been designed to allow stocks to recover, but reduced fishing also means fewer discards for the skuas.

And rather than go hungry, the birds are preying on other seabirds like puffins and kittiwakes.

The impact on other seabird species is not insignificant. A recent study found that a five per cent increase of birds in the skua diet would result in an annual loss of thousands of other seabirds. In some areas, the level of predation by skuas is already unsustainable and the authors conclude that the situation “presents a potentially serious threat to some seabird communities.”

We have to remember that nature does not behave in a simple, linear fashion. Our natural systems have, over millions of years, developed complex systems of checks and balances. Humanity is now powerful enough to meddle with those systems and the results are unpredictable. That’s something to keep in mind when we consider climate change, genetically modified food and other
emerging scientific issues. We have to be cautious.

And we can’t assume we know how things will turn out, because with nature, the answer is rarely simple.

Copyright © 2004 Environmental News Network Inc.

---

Visit the David Suzuki Foundation

Reposted from the Sunday, February 22, 2004 edition of the Observer/UK.

---

Secret Pentagon Report Warns: Climate Crisis Imminent!

Mark Townsend and Paul Harris

Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters.

Key findings of the Pentagon Report Σ Future wars will be fought over the issue of survival rather than religion, ideology or national honor. Σ By 2007 violent storms smash coastal barriers rendering large parts of the Netherlands inhabitable. Cities like The Hague are abandoned. In California the delta island levees in the Sacramento river area are breached, disrupting the aqueduct system transporting water from north to south. Σ Between 2010 and 2020 Europe is hardest hit by climatic change with an average annual temperature drop of 6F. Climate in Britain becomes colder and drier as weather patterns begin to resemble Siberia. Σ Deaths from war and famine run into the millions until the planet’s population is reduced by such an extent the Earth can cope. Σ Riots and internal conflict tear apart India, South Africa and Indonesia. Σ Access to water becomes a major battleground. The Nile, Danube and Amazon are all mentioned as being high risk. Σ A ‘significant drop’ in the planet’s ability to sustain its present population will become apparent over the next 20 years. Σ Rich areas like the US and Europe would become ‘virtual fortresses’ to prevent millions of migrants from entering after being forced from land drowned by sea-level rise or no longer able to grow crops. Waves of boatpeople pose significant problems. Σ Nuclear arms proliferation is inevitable. Japan, South Korea, and Germany develop nuclear-weapons capabilities, as do Iran, Egypt and North Korea. Israel, China, India and Pakistan also are poised to use the bomb. Σ By 2010 the US and Europe will experience a third more days with peak temperatures above 90F. Climate becomes an ‘economic nuisance’ as storms, droughts and hot spells create havoc for farmers. Σ More than 400m people in subtropical regions at grave risk. Σ Europe will face huge internal struggles as it copes with massive numbers of migrants washing up on its shores. Immigrants from Scandinavia seek warmer climes to the south. Southern Europe is beleaguered by refugees from hard-hit countries in Africa. Σ Mega-droughts affect the world’s major breadbaskets, including America’s Midwest, where strong winds bring soil loss. Σ China’s huge population and food demand make it particularly vulnerable. Bangladesh becomes nearly uninhabitable because of a rising sea level, which contaminates the inland water supplies.

 A secret report, suppressed by US defense chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.

‘Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,’ concludes the Pentagon analysis. ‘Once again, warfare would define human life.’

The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defense is a priority.

The report was commissioned by influential Pentagon defense adviser Andrew Marshall, who has held considerable sway on US military thinking over the past three decades. He was the man behind a sweeping recent review aimed at transforming the American military under Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Climate change ‘should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US national security concern’, say the authors, Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network.

An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is ‘plausible and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately’, they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions.

Last week the Bush administration came under heavy fire from a large body of respected scientists who claimed that it cherry-picked science to suit its policy agenda and suppressed studies that it did not like. Jeremy Symons, a former whistleblower at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), said that suppression of the report for four months was a further example of the White House trying to bury the threat of climate change.

Senior climatologists, however, believe that their verdicts could prove the catalyst in forcing Bush to accept climate change as a real and happening phenomenon. They also hope it will convince the United States to sign up to global treaties to reduce the rate of climatic change.

A group of eminent UK scientists recently visited the White House to voice their fears over global warming, part of an intensifying drive to get the US to treat the issue seriously. Sources have told The Observer that American officials appeared extremely sensitive about the issue when faced with complaints that America’s public stance appeared increasingly out of touch.

One even alleged that the White House had written to complain about some of the comments attributed to Professor Sir David King, Tony Blair’s chief scientific adviser, after he branded the President’s position on the issue as indefensible.

Among those scientists present at the White House talks were Professor John Schellnhuber, former chief environmental adviser to the German government and head of the UK’s leading group of climate scientists at the Tyndall Center for Climate Change Research. He said that the Pentagon’s internal fears should prove the ‘tipping point’ in persuading Bush to accept climatic change.

Sir John Houghton, former chief executive of the Meteorological Office – and the first senior figure to liken the threat of climate change to that of terrorism – said: ‘If the Pentagon is sending out that sort of message, then this is an important document indeed.’

Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added that the Pentagon’s dire warnings could no longer be ignored.

‘Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It’s going be hard to blow off this sort of document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush’s single highest priority is national defense The Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group, generally speaking it is conservative. If climate change is a threat to national security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two groups the Bush Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby and the Pentagon,’ added Watson.

‘You’ve got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and across the Potomac river you’ve got a Pentagon preparing for climate wars. It’s pretty scary when Bush starts to ignore his own government on this issue,’ said Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace.

Already, according to Randall and Schwartz, the planet is carrying a higher population than it can sustain. By 2020 ‘catastrophic’ shortages of water and energy supply will become increasingly harder to overcome, plunging the planet into war. They warn that 8,200 years ago climatic conditions brought widespread crop failure, famine, disease and mass migration of populations that could soon be repeated.

Randall told The Observer that the potential ramifications of rapid climate change would create global chaos. ‘This is depressing stuff,’ he said. ‘It is a national security threat that is unique because there is no enemy to point your guns at and we have no control over the threat.’

Randall added that it was already possibly too late to prevent a disaster happening. ‘We don’t know exactly where we are in the process. It could start tomorrow and we would not know for another five years,’ he said.

‘The consequences for some nations of the climate change are unbelievable. It seems obvious that cutting the use of fossil fuels would be worthwhile.’

So dramatic are the report’s scenarios, Watson said, that they may prove vital in the US elections. Democratic frontrunner John Kerry is known to accept climate change as a real problem. Scientists disillusioned with Bush’s stance are threatening to make sure Kerry uses the Pentagon report in his campaign.

The fact that Marshall is behind its scathing findings will aid Kerry’s cause. Marshall, 82, is a Pentagon legend who heads a secretive think-tank dedicated to weighing risks to national security called the Office of Net Assessment. Dubbed ‘Yoda’ by Pentagon insiders who respect his vast experience, he is credited with being behind the Department of Defense’s push on ballistic-missile defense

Symons, who left the EPA in protest at political interference, said that the suppression of the report was a further instance of the White House trying to bury evidence of climate change. ‘It is yet another example of why this government should stop burying its head in the sand on this issue.’

Symons said the Bush administration’s close links to high-powered energy and oil companies was vital in understanding why climate change was received skeptically in the Oval Office. ‘This administration is ignoring the evidence in order to placate a handful of large energy and oil companies,’ he added.

© Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004

---

Ross Gelbspan’s HISTORY AT RISK: THE CRISIS OF THE GLOBAL CLIMATE

Google Global Warming

Assuming we do nothing to prepare for the coming Fossil Fuel Depletion Crisis, we can expect very hard times ahead. Much harder than most of us can imagine. This morning’s writer gives us a preview of coming attractions.

Reposted from the Energy Resources Yahoo Group. Thanks for the link to Dexter Graphic.

---

 A Future Without Oil

Perry Arnett 

Most everyone thinking carefully about the energy future seems to agree with the following assumptions: That -

1) oil is a finite resource

2) as oil is extracted from the earth there is less of it remaining

3) the earth’s crust can only contain so much oil

4) the geology of how oil is formed and where it is trapped suggests that most of the oil in the earth’s crust has already been found

5) oil began to be exploited generally, in about 1860

6) taking all the best guesses since that time, about half of the assumed oil in the earth has been used, leaving about half the oil in the earth yet to be extracted

7) The problem with #6 is that world oil-consuming population is increasing so fast (e.g. China and it’s associated auto industry…) that the half remaining will be used in 1/5th? to 1/8th? the time it took to use the first half! [the slope going up was difficult, but gentle; the slope going down will be steep and torturous...]

there are folks all around the world who glean every report from every oil company and government and wildcatters and rough necks trying to put one more decimal place to the numbers, so while it can be stated fairly accurately that no one knows how much oil there was, or is, or remains, the best informed estimates – because they are so diverse – are probably not too far from reality.

9) if you then throw in factors like Iraq, where no one knows how much oil was extracted during the past 15 years or so, and no one really knows how much oil there was to begin with there, it makes the suppositions of some begin to ring true that there may have been far LESS oil under Iraq than most originally thought, and that more of it may have already been exploited than most originally thought; so you may find (in the future), that Iraqi oil was not worth the war to get it!

10) the extraction/production of most natural resources can be generally plotted by imagining a standard parabolic curve where initial extraction begins at zero on the left, gently rises over time to the right until reaching a ‘peak’, then gently falling over time until reaching zero again. This is called the “Hubbert Curve” or Hubbert Peak after the geologist who discovered it. If it looked as I have described it, it would be symmetrical. But in the real world it is not symmetrical but is rather, up and down as extraction activities rise and fall.

11) thus, one definition of the ‘peak of oil’ production is that time when about half the oil that there is has been extracted, leaving about half the oil remaining to be extracted.

Why is this such an important thing to discuss?

While new discoveries and increasing production were possible, growth was possible. When energy resource discoveries peter out and production tops out and begins to decline, EVERYTHING else in life dependent upon energy has to decline with it. So ‘peak oil’ is a point that takes on an importance barely understood by most, but that’s why its placement in time is so eagerly sought after.

For what its worth, I personally think we passed ‘peak’ by 1999/2000; some say 2000, others say 2003, others say 2007, the USGS says 2030(!), etc. [even the most optimistic estimates are dire, so the least optimistic estimates are perceived as being cataclysmic!] Take your pick. But when I see what I see on the international economic scene I am left with no sense other than that the peak of world oil production has probably already passed. I seem to be in pretty good company since Deffeyes and Heinberg and Goldstein and Duncan and Simmons and Bahktiari all seem to have the same view.

12) but the point of peak oil is not so much WHEN it occurs, but rather the effects on our lives AFTER it occurs!

As an example, let us consider my granddaughter who is one year old. She would normally graduate from high school in, say, 2020 (16 years from now).

The natural gas ‘cliff’ will hit 2007-2010; (because natural gas production is largely self-pressurized in the well, when a NG well quits it is usually sudden and without any previous signals, unlike an oil well where there are signs in advance of its depletion that it is beginning to “go dry”; thus the ‘end’ of NG is described as being not a peak, but rather as a ‘cliff’). As the NG cliff is reached, electricity generation will be the first to be effected and with that, will go primary industries like mining, smelting, metal fabrication and the like. [witness the shutting down ALREADY of aluminum smelters in the Pacific NW, and fertilizer and ammonia production facilities all over the world - due to electricity costs/availability ]

The first major effects of oil peak will have occurred by ~2012? – this coming just a few years after the NG cliff!; the availability of electricity in the US will soon be on a par with electricity availability in say, China or Ukraine now; spotty, rationed, rolling blackouts, and less and less of it each month, until -

Some day soon, ~2010-15? the Net will go down – and never come back up; some time after that ~2015-2020? the US electrical grid will go down, – and never come back up.

As soon as those two events occur, life “as we know it” will have been changed forever.

All chemical processing, petroleum refining, mining, agriculture, auto manufacturing, all telcom-driven international credit, finance and banking will cease; (by ‘all’, I mean such a large percentage of the existing activity as to call it ‘all’ for our purpose here). Auto manufacturing will have ceased by ~2012-2015? (there being either or both no gasoline with which to drive them and little electricity with which to make them); used SUV’s may be selling for a loaf of bread or a pound of sugar by ~2015; by ~2015 there will probably be no air travel except for very high muckymucks in government – which will be so rare people will step outside and point up in the sky again….;

Most schools and universities will have closed by ~2017-2020? – no heat, no lights, no money for teachers, no internet, no need…; roads and freeways will have been so unmaintained that by ~2013-2016? they will be effectively useless.

Elevators in most buildings will have stopped running by ~2012-2015?, making commerce, insurance, banking, pensions, annuities, bond, commodity and equity markets dysfunctional.

I’ve left out the obvious “resource wars” (oil, NG, water, chrome, molybdenum, etc….) currently, and soon to be “in a theater near you”…

Is this another Y2K false alarm?

 Y2K was the perfect reverse analog to the future. Why? because all the stuff that might have happened didn’t, which is the reverse of what lies ahead. Why is that? Y2K didn’t happen, largely, because things were fixed, or remediated. But there is no remediation for a dry oil well. There is no remediation for a dry natural gas well. There is no remediation for the loss of the cheap, readily available, high content energy sources the world has been living off for the past 150 years. When they are gone, they’re gone. And most of our lifestyles with them.

So – what should my daughter be teaching her daughter as skills necessary for survival, and a high quality of life, for life after 2020?

---

Read more about the Fossil Fuel Depletion Crisis. Here are Duncan’s 1996 paper on the Olduvai Theory, and his  followup paper of November 2000. I also recommend two papers by Jay Hanson, Energy Synopsis and A Means of Control . For those who like their Truth unvarnished, the whole story can be found at Jay Hanson´s excellent website. Also see:

Colin J. Campbell’s address to Parliament

Colin J. Campbell and Jean H. Laherr‘re in Scientific American, March 1998

L.F. Ivanhoe, Get Ready For Another Oil Shock

Matthew Simmons is one of the leading energy advisors to President George Bush and the United States Congress.

More about Community Supported Agriculture reposted from The New Farm.

---

CSA’s World of Possibilities

Steven McFadden

In 1990, when I coauthored “Farms of Tomorrow” with Trauger Groh, there were about 60 CSAs in the United States. The years from 1986 to 1990, I feel, mark the first wave of CSA (Community Supported Agriculture) development.

One of the many benefits of belonging to a CSA is that these farms typically grow and promote the preservation of old-time regional varieties, such as these heirloom and native squash, melons, potatoes, and onions from the Eastern Native Seed Conservancy.Photo by Jason Houston

Eight years later, when I returned to the subject with Trauger to write “Farms of Tomorrow Revisited,” we found there had been steady growth in the CSA movement, albeit growth in many different directions.

CSA had diversified into a range of social and legal forms, with philosophically oriented CSAs at one end and commercially oriented subscription farms at the other. Books were written, organizations such as the Biodynamic Farming and Gardening Assoc. and Robyn Van En´s CSA North America took an active interest, and the movement enjoyed a steady stream of favorable publicity. The CSA archetypes and infrastructure had been established. By the late 1990s, at least 1,000 CSAs had taken root in the United States, and growth continued quietly.

This slow, steady increase through the 1990s up through 2003 constitutes a second wave of CSA development.

While CSAs overall numbers have climbed over the years, there has been a significant attrition rate and many CSAs have failed. Common causes of failure include: The farmers did not ask enough for their effort, they did not have the skill to grow adequately, or they were farming on unsecured land. Some CSAs have also failed because the members of the community could not get along.

For the past five or six years, estimates of CSA numbers have remained in a range from 1,000 to 1,200. But most educated observers say that number is low. Many CSAs operate privately and quietly, while most regions of the country report many new CSA farms. Thus, it follows that a more up-to-date and accurate estimate would be around 1,500 to 1,700 CSA farms across the country, ranging in size from large gardens with a few households to hundreds of acres with more than 1,000 subscribers.

Now in 2004, after talking with CSA observers around the country, I see strong potential for a third wave of CSA development, a wave that could not only triple or quadruple the number of CSAs over the next few years, but also raise in importance the role these farms play in their communities.

Motivating forces

When families share in the planting and harvest, everyone ends up appreciating where their food comes from (and it tastes better, too). Pictured in truck from the left, it’s Marley, Roger and Kai Reed. Photo by Jason Houston

Allan Balliett has followed the CSA movement since its beginnings and is himself a biodynamic farmer at Fresh and Local CSA in Shepherdstown, W.V. From the outset, he said, he has heard consumers voice concerns over food safety and quality as primary reasons for joining a CSA.

Susan Witt of the Schumacher Society said another motivating factor behind the growth of CSA has been awareness about the problems of the global economy. “By now the dominance of the mega-corporations has become so obvious that many people recognize the danger, and the need to create something safe, local, and sustainable. CSA does that. It isn´t easy, but it works.”

Apprentices and interns of all ages and walks of life often help comprise the backbone of a successful CSA. Pictured here at Temple-Wilton Community Farm, Carl from the U.K. Photo by Ken Sullivan

Meanwhile, food safety and security issues appear to be growing in scale and scope. The arrival of mad cow disease to this country is heightening concerns. When coupled with awareness of global climate changes and the onslaught of dubious fertilizers, pesticides, and genetic engineering into the food chain, many people are beginning to regard CSA as homeland security of the most fundamental kind. These linked concerns bid strong to propel another surge of CSA growth.

Whether safety concerns act as a motivating engine or not, the basic common sense of CSA will continue to earn community farms a welcome place in a growing number of U.S. (and global) cities, suburbs, and towns.

Jim Sluyter, co-editor of The Community Farm newsletter, is enthusiastic about the future. “The Time magazine article that was published in October 2003 (1) is having a huge impact on CSA,” he said. “The fact that a large-circulation newsmagazine found CSA worthy of a story is a milestone; a new threshold. It puts CSA in the big time.

“It seems as if there is another level of CSA development taking place, not just in the U.S. but also internationally,” Sluyter said. “There is a lot happening. Australia is starting up a network of CSAs, we understand, and also Hungry, India, Hong Kong, Holland, and especially England, where the Soil Association is strongly promoting CSA.”

CSAs are also developing in Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, France, Denmark and Germany. In Japan, CSA is well developed–tteikei [partnerships with local farmers through annual subscriptions] is a mature movement, reportedly with millions of members.

Thanks to the existing CSA models, all these potent motivating forces have a roadmap to some safe, economical, and creative pathways. “The scene is much more settled for CSA now than in earlier years,” said Anthony Graham of the Temple-Wilton farm. ìA lot of CSAs are maturing. People know for a fact that they are worthwhile. The CSA organism is growing older, the movement maturing. The CSA roots are deeper, broader, and more stable. There is something to build on.”

The context for growth

Elizabeth Keen of Indian Line Farm sets up at the Great Barrington Farmer´s Market. Photo by Jason Houston

While still minuscule in the overall scheme of all things agricultural, CSA does occupy an interesting niche. It represents at least a partial answer and in some cases a complete answer to many of the profound challenges now facing this country and the world.

The United Nations recently released a report on global economics (4). The report stated baldly: “There is overwhelming evidence that ‘efficient’ (industrial) agriculture is not only mining the natural resource base but also influencing other parts of the environment in ways that are detrimental to the well-being of humankind.”

Meanwhile, the United States is drastically cutting back on spending for sustainable agriculture in the 2004 budget and has no clearly defined strategy for steering toward a sustainable future.

“Rural America is hanging on by its fingernails,” Rep. Marcy Kaptur [D-Ohio] recently told the New York Times (5). A member of the Agriculture Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, Kaptur said, “There’s a sense of urgency in the countryside. It’s real, it’s volatile.”

With tightening federal and state budgets, the government may not be in a position to help. But CSA does not need the government or outside funding. All it requires is good land and a community willing to care for the land so it can feed them.

The cooperation key

Elizabeth Keen (right) and an Indian Line Farm intern prepare to plant lettuce. Photo by Jason Houston

To run a CSA successfully, farmers must produce adequate, nutritious and attractive food. That´s a baseline. But they and the people around them also have to know how to engage one another creatively and to weave themselves together into a modern community. Cooperation has been a key for those CSAs that have hung together and matured over a number of years.

In the realm of cooperation, core group participation stands as the ultimate CSA paradox. Almost all CSA farmers say “We need a deeper commitment.” That´s something they really want from consumers–loyalty over the long term. But core groups of consumers who help run the farm are not all that popular, even though they are a proven way to develop the kind of commitment farmers want. Naturally, if a core group has a say in the farm, the farmers can feel their lives are more complicated.

One man´s work is another man´s party; subscriber participation is one of several effective CSA models. Photo by Jason Houston

Allan Balliett, a long-time observer of and participant in CSA, suggested that the movement has reached a plateau on this issue. “There´s kind of an exhaustion of emotional energy of the first and second waves of CSA development,” he said. “But what´s going to happen when questions of sustainability arise for people without a set of shared values? What happens when tough economic times catch up with subscription farms? Is a community really necessary for a CSA? Or do you just need a group of consumers?”

CSAs in this Mid-Atlantic region are now mostly farmer-driven, not consumer-driven, Allan said. That is, in fact, clearly the emerging pattern. According to Jo Meller, co-editor of The Community Farm with Jim Sluyter, “There are regional distinctions, at least in broad strokes.”. “The Northeast has smaller farms with more core groups where the members are more active. The Midwest is more farmer-driven. In California you have huge CSA farms on a scale that hasn´t seemed feasible elsewhere.”

While they are not to every farmer´s liking, core groups are one way to extend a CSA´s range of support and commitment. If times get tough, will CSAs with solid communities be better poised to survive than ‘one farmer against the world´ xx

Martha Cornwell is director of the Robyn Van En Center for CSA at Wilson College. She sees the cooperation issue from a broad perspective. “One thing I definitely see ahead is more and more collaboration and cooperation among farms. CSAs are looking for a way to work together, especially in urban areas. We are going to see a lot more multi-farm cooperation.”

Jo Meller said that she and Jim also recognize expansion of the multi-farm, multi-product CSA operation. “We are seeing a lot of producers joining with other producersWe see bakeries, orchards, vegetable farms, co-ops, whatever, linking to form networks of support.”

What seems to be evolving are matrices of community farms with different capacities and specialties. For example, the Chequamegon CSA is a cooperative of six growers in Wisconsin, and Maryland´s Mountains to Bay CSA links 13 family farms to provide 20 weeks of fruits, herbs, flowers and vegetables.

Meanwhile, Angelic Organics, a 1,000-member biodynamic CSA in Caledonia, Ill., is part of a network of more than 22 farms partnering in an extensive apprentice program: the Collaborative Regional Alliance for Farming Training (CRAFT) program, training a new generation of farmers. By many accounts, that generation is coming on strong, many young people with agricultural vocations have a keen interest in CSA.

The land issue

For More Information… Angelic Organics 1547 Rockton Rd. Caledonia, IL 61011-9572 815-389-2746 http://www.angelicorganics.com/ Allan Balliett Fresh and Local CSA Shepherdstown, WV 304-876-3382 email:info@freshandlocalcsa.com http://www.freshandlocalCSA.com Alternative Farming Systems Information Center Of the National Agricultural Library (national data base listing of CSAs) http://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/csa Anthroposophy (general information) http://www.elib.com Biodynamic Farming and Gardening Association, Inc. 25844 Butler Road Junction City, OR 97448 (888)516-7797 (541)998-0105 email biodynamic@aol.com http://www.biodynamics.com Birsmattehof Germany http://www.birsmattehof.ch Les Jardins de Cocagne Switzerland http://www.joyeux.ch/cocagne/ Buschberghof Germany http://www.Buschberghof.de CSA-L An e-mail discussion list about CSA http://www.prairienet.org/ pcsa/CSA-L/ Ellie Kastanopolous, Co-director Equity Trust, Inc. 539 Voluntown, CT 06384 Phone: 860-376-6174 E-mail: ellie@equitytrust.org http://www.equitytrust.org Robyn Van En Center for CSA Resources Fulton Center for Sustainable Living Wilson College 1015 Philadelphia Avenue Chambersburg PA 17201 Phone: 717-264-4141 x3352 e-mail: info@csacenter.org http://www.csacenter.org Future Harvest-CASA P.O. Box 337 106 Market Court Stevensville, MD 21666 phone: 410-604-2681 http://www.futureharvest casa.org/index.html email: fhcasa@friend.ly.net Soil Association Bristol House 40-56 Victoria Street, Bristol, BS1 6BY England http://www.cuco.org.uk/ e-mail: csa@cuco.org.uk Indian Line Farm CSA Jug End Road South Egremont, MA http://www.lastgreatplaces.org/ berkshire/explore/art6564.html Temple-Wilton Community Farm 195 Isaac Frye Highway Wilton, N.H. 03086 http://www.templewilton communityfarm.com/ Mountains to Bay CSA Maryland Contact Fay Northam, 301-855-0137 email: fayln@hotmail.com. Susan Witt, executive director E. F. Schumacher Society. (Model legal documents for CSA land trust are available.) 140 Jug End Road Great Barrington, MA 01230 (413) 528-1737 http://www.smallisbeautiful.org

Land for the Temple-Wilton Community farm is held in common by the community through a legal trust. Pictured founding members Lincoln Geiger, Anthony Graham, and Trauger Groh. Photo courtesy of Trauger Groh

“For a host of reasons,” Allan Balliett says, “I believe strongly that for the safety and long-term strength and independence of CSA farms, they should go hand-in-hand with community land trusts. This is a central issue.” With the help of a community, land can be permanently set aside for farming and made available to farmers at a reasonable cost with a long-term lease.

Ellie Kastanopolous is co-director of Equity Trust, Inc., a group that has provided support to CSAs for more than a decade. “We work with many wonderful farmers who produce great crops that their shareholders love, and who are able to earn a substantial income in return for their efforts,” she said. “But they still can´t afford to buy farmland.”

“CSAs tend to be near urban areas, and that´s where the land values are high, and the whole constellation of land issues and development is intense. A lot of CSAs are set up on rented land. This makes them vulnerable. They can improve the fertility of the land, and then lose the use of it… If a CSA is going to succeed long term, then it better start thinking about securing its land base.”

Both of the original CSA farms–Indian Line and Temple-Wilton–spent years grappling with the land issue. Both farms, operating out of their own best judgment, eventually secured land long-term through the vehicle of a land trust. This step has greatly increased the farms´ long-term chances of survival.

Jo Meller and Jim Sluyter see the same thing. “So many young people want to grow food and feed people,” Jim said. “That´s what they are called to do. But they cannot afford land. Mostly these are people in their late 20s and early 30s who want to learn about sustainable farming and CSA. We see CSAs moving more and more toward community-owned farmland.”

Rising on Merit

Honoring the roots of CSA: Robyn Van En (1949-1997) and Indian Line´s first farmer, Hugh Ratcliffe, gleefully load up another bountiful harvest. Photo by Clemens Kalischer

If CSA is going to have a solid and progressive third wave of growth and development, it´s not likely to be generated by a government program or by the publicity campaign of a well-intended nonprofit, or even so much by fear of terrorists or corrupt food. A solid third wave of development ought by rights to rise instead on merit: from a real assessment of the benefits that can come from creating and supporting community farms.

After 18 years, CSA has proven itself. Now many of the forces that have brought it to its state of early maturity are conspiring for what might well be another big wave of development. There is tremendous potential.

CSA can play a substantial part in a sustainable future. It has the potential to establish thousands of cells of environmental vitality in cities, suburbs and countryside, and to extend basic, healthy linkages among the people who make up a community.

As we know from its beginnings, CSA is not just a clever, new approach to marketing. Community farming is about the necessary renewal of agriculture through its healthy linkage with the human community that depends upon farming for survival.
Journalist Steven McFadden co-authored “Farms of Tomorrow: Community Supported Farms, Farm Supported Communities” (1990), and “Farms of Tomorrow Revisited” (1998) with Trauger Groh. Steven is the director of Chiron Communications in Santa Fe, NM http://www.chiron-communications.com
References:
1. Time magazine, Nov. 3, 2003. ìFresh Off the Farm, A new breed of planters and eaters are joining forces to nurture the local-foods movement”

2. Organic Gardening magazine, April 1984, “Produce by Subscription” and July 1986, “From Farms to Families.”

3. Z¸rich Supported Agriculture by Jan Vander Tuin, RAIN magazine, Vol. XIV Number 2, Winter/Spring 1992. http://www.urbanology.com/csa/zurcsa.html

4. UN Report on Sustainability
http://www.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/uu24ee/uu24ee00.htm#Contents

5. The New York Times, December 1, 2003, “Amid Dying Towns of Rural Plains, One Makes a Stand” By Timothy Egan. 

©2003 The Rodale Institute

 

---

Read more from The New Farm.